More Telegraph outrage at MOD CS

#4
The only bonus they should get is: if you do your job as required throughout the year, you will have a job next year.
 
#5
It's because Francis Maude has pissed off someone in Torygraph HQ....
 
#6
It's because Francis Maude has pissed off someone in Torygraph HQ....
The Barclay Twins? Given they're hidden away on their private island and seemingly never make public appearances, I find that difficult to believe.
 
#7
They run the same old crappy story every year. It's the same old CS performance related pay scheme. Lazy journalism at its absolute worst.
 
#8
The Barclay Twins? Given they're hidden away on their private island and seemingly never make public appearances, I find that difficult to believe.
No, there was a throw-away line at conservativehome.com - and it was the Daily Nazi, I apologise for confusing my right-wing rags......
 
#9
No, there was a throw-away line at conservativehome.com - and it was the Daily Nazi, I apologise for confusing my right-wing rags......
You were thinking of Paul "We need to do something about paparazzi" Dacre.
 
#10

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
#13
The only bonus they should get is: if you do your job as required throughout the year, you will have a job next year.
If you trouble yourself to talk to any MoD CS, you'll discover that the "bonus scheme" was imposed on them by the Treasury a decade ago, and is deeply resented and disliked.

However, given the current exodus, it may not be a problem for too long...
 
#14
My personal money is on it being Bernard Grey (CDM). TO leave a lucrative private sector salary for a job that pays far less than his equivalents in the private sector (barely £100K or a 1* salary) per year, then I suspect he would have had a decent bonus written in to his contract. The scale of money awarded here goes far beyond that awarded to any CS I've ever heard of.

I wonder if his old mate Liam signed off the deal when appointing him - is this a minor political scandal emerging?
 

Wordsmith

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
These stories will be with us for some time to come. It's not the fact that individuals get bonuses - its that so many individuals get bonuses as a matter of course.

The bonuses have been paid since April last year and have seen more than 55,000 officials awarded extra payments for their performance - out of a payroll of 83,000.
In the private sector the great majority of bonuses are work related. My big boss gets a bonus pool to distribute among the department. That's based on profit: no profit = no bonus pool. He then looks at individual performance. If you perform well - you get a good bonus. If you go through the motions - you get nothing.

Bonuses should be for exceptional performance. In well run company, I would expect to see maybe 10% getting good bonuses and another 10% getting nominal bonuses. What I would not expect to see is 2/3 of the department getting bonuses.

You pay a bonus for exceptional work - you don't pay bonuses for someone who turns up and does their job. The money you get paid for doing your job is a salary not a bonus.

The Conservatives are now starting to delve into exactly what the public sector costs us. And one thing that they can chop with my compliments is guaranteed bonuses. If someone does an exceptional job they should get a bonus - otherwise they should get salary only.

Wordsmith
 
#19
And what have I misunderstood? Feel free to explain.

Wordsmith
At a very simple level, we denied the CS a payrise for a fair number of years, and then introduced a 'bonus' system that was significantly less than a payrise, and gave it to most people.

What amuses me the most is when DE&S becomes a trading fund, you can bet your bottom dollar CDM will get far bigger bonuses than that being reported. Indeed, I suspect most of the Armed Forces management chain (say, from PO/Sgt/Crab equivalent to 4*) would be due a bonus as well - same output for a reduction by upto 15% in costs is not insignificant in any line of business.....
 
#20
These stories will be with us for some time to come. It's not the fact that individuals get bonuses - its that so many individuals get bonuses as a matter of course.

You pay a bonus for exceptional work - you don't pay bonuses for someone who turns up and does their job. The money you get paid for doing your job is a salary not a bonus.

Wordsmith
As a serving Civil Servant, I do not disagree with you - I have never received a bonus of any description, despite receiving appraisals which would seem to suggest that I perhaps should; I do, however, receive what I consider to be a relatively generous salary which puts me into the 40% tax bracket. And, of course, a final salary pension, although my contributions seem to have increased quite sharply since Xmas. The problem with the bonus culture is twofold: far too many of the Senior Civil Service seem to experience avarice beyond Cresus upon promotion to Grade 7 and above - they have completely bought into the 'because I'm worth it culture' that seems to pervade Home Office senior management - and far too many of the Department's junior staff are very poorly paid, especially AAs and AOs but also EOs who do not receive an operational allowances. A friend of mine (a former EO in UKBA N.B. EO not Immigration Officer etc.) used to receive an annual bonus of 600 notes for exceptional performance in detention management - in reality, she saved the Department thousands by performance monitoring the contract with G4S. Her bonuses, to her, at least were more than a nice-to-have - they helped her pay for the kind of wedding that she wanted. Her far-from-generous salary (less than a Sgt's) was living proof of how the most junior management grade was undervalued. Junior Civil Service salaries started to fall behind under Blair and Brown - the bulk of the pay rises went to Assistant Director's and above, in the mistaken belief that this would somehow drive up performance. It didn't.
 

Latest Threads

Top